Debate contribution: Harper’s Law: Sentencing Bill
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 1 December 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Harper’s Law: Sentencing Bill
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5269122
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Whether the Member decides to table an amendment is purely a matter for him. I would have to consider the nature of that amendment. I am not opposed to Harper's law, as, I think, I discussed with you. The issue is this: it has not been used anywhere that it has been introduced, so, in effect, it puts on paper and in statute something that is not being operationalised in practice. My concern is that, if you make it mandatory, there might be situations in which people are charged with a lesser offence in order to avoid the mandatory sentence, which would potentially have a deleterious effect on prosecution. I am happy to continue to engage with the Member about it. I cannot say for sure that the law has not been used; I simply say that, to date, we have not seen any case in which it has been deployed in England and Wales. Thankfully, that may be as a result of there being few cases of manslaughter of a police officer. I am certainly happy to continue to engage with the Member on the sentencing Bill. If not through that engagement, the sentencing review, which should be launched later this month, will be a good vehicle for us to test opinion on the issue.
216 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.93).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:03 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.